The relationship between fruit and vegetable intake with gastroesophageal reflux disease in Iranian adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Findings from studies that investigated the relationship between fruit and vegetable intake with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) were inconsistent. We aimed to assess the relationship between fruit and vegetable consumption and GERD among a large group of Iranian adults. Materials and Methods: In this cross-sectional study on 3979 adults, a validated food frequency questionnaire was used to assess usual dietary intakes including fruits and vegetables. The presence of heartburn sometimes or more during the past 3 months were considered as having GERD. Results: The prevalence of GERD among study population was 23.9%. After adjustment for potential confounding factors, those with the highest consumption of fruits had 25% lower risk for GERD, in comparison to those with the lowest intake (odds ratio [OR] = 0.75, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.59–0.97). Vegetable intake was not significantly related to the risk of GERD in crude or multivariable-adjusted models. However, participants with the highest intake of fruits and vegetables had 33% lower risk of GERD (OR = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.51–0.88), after adjustment for confounders. Women with the highest fruit and vegetable intake had 36% lower risk for GERD (OR = 0.64, 95% CI: 0.45–0.91). Overweight/obese participants in the last tertile of fruit consumption had 42% lower risk for GERD, in comparison to the first category (OR = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.42–0.83). Furthermore, participants with body mass index higher than 25 kg/m 2 and higher intake of fruits and vegetables had 53% lower risk for GERD (OR = 0.47, 95% CI: 0.32-0.69). Conclusion: We found inverse associations between fruit intake as well as fruit and vegetable intake and risk of GERD among Iranian adults.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".